Articles | Volume 16, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-2415-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-2415-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Applicability of the low-cost OPC-N3 optical particle counter for microphysical measurements of fog
Institute of Geophysics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Moein Mohammadi
Institute of Geophysics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Szymon Malinowski
Institute of Geophysics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Krzysztof Markowicz
Institute of Geophysics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Related authors
No articles found.
Robert Grosz, Kamal Kant Chandrakar, Raymond A. Shaw, Jesse C. Anderson, Will Cantrell, and Szymon P. Malinowski
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2051, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2051, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our objective was to enhance understanding of thermally-driven convection in terms of small-scale variations in the temperature scalar field. We conducted a small-scale study on the temperature field in the Π Chamber using three different temperature differences (10 K, 15 K, and 20 K). Measurements were carried out using a miniaturized UltraFast Thermometer operating at 2 kHz, allowing undisturbed vertical temperature profiling from 8 cm above the floor to 5 cm below the ceiling.
Jakub L. Nowak, Marie Lothon, Donald H. Lenschow, and Szymon P. Malinowski
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1366, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1366, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
According to a classical theory, the ratio of turbulence statistics corresponding to transverse and longitudinal wind velocity components equals 4/3 in the inertial range of scales. We analyze large amount of measurements obtained with three research aircraft during four field experiments in different locations and show the observed ratios are almost always significantly smaller. We discuss potential reasons of this disagreement but actual explanation remains to be determined.
Jakub L. Nowak, Robert Grosz, Wiebke Frey, Dennis Niedermeier, Jędrzej Mijas, Szymon P. Malinowski, Linda Ort, Silvio Schmalfuß, Frank Stratmann, Jens Voigtländer, and Tadeusz Stacewicz
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 4075–4089, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4075-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4075-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
A high-resolution infrared hygrometer (FIRH) was adapted to measure humidity and its rapid fluctuations in turbulence inside a moist-air wind tunnel LACIS-T where two air streams of different temperature and humidity are mixed. The measurement was achieved from outside the tunnel through its glass windows and provided an agreement with a reference dew-point hygrometer placed inside. The characterization of humidity complements previous investigations of velocity and temperature fields.
Moein Mohammadi, Jakub L. Nowak, Guus Bertens, Jan Moláček, Wojciech Kumala, and Szymon P. Malinowski
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 965–985, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-965-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-965-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
To compare two instruments, a VisiSize D30 shadowgraph system and a phase Doppler interferometer (PDI-FPDR), we performed a series of measurements of cloud droplet size and number concentration in orographic clouds. After applying essential modifications and filters to the data, the results from the two instruments showed better agreement in droplet sizing and velocimetry than droplet number concentration or liquid water content. Discrepancies were observed for droplets smaller than 13 µm.
Bjorn Stevens, Sandrine Bony, David Farrell, Felix Ament, Alan Blyth, Christopher Fairall, Johannes Karstensen, Patricia K. Quinn, Sabrina Speich, Claudia Acquistapace, Franziska Aemisegger, Anna Lea Albright, Hugo Bellenger, Eberhard Bodenschatz, Kathy-Ann Caesar, Rebecca Chewitt-Lucas, Gijs de Boer, Julien Delanoë, Leif Denby, Florian Ewald, Benjamin Fildier, Marvin Forde, Geet George, Silke Gross, Martin Hagen, Andrea Hausold, Karen J. Heywood, Lutz Hirsch, Marek Jacob, Friedhelm Jansen, Stefan Kinne, Daniel Klocke, Tobias Kölling, Heike Konow, Marie Lothon, Wiebke Mohr, Ann Kristin Naumann, Louise Nuijens, Léa Olivier, Robert Pincus, Mira Pöhlker, Gilles Reverdin, Gregory Roberts, Sabrina Schnitt, Hauke Schulz, A. Pier Siebesma, Claudia Christine Stephan, Peter Sullivan, Ludovic Touzé-Peiffer, Jessica Vial, Raphaela Vogel, Paquita Zuidema, Nicola Alexander, Lyndon Alves, Sophian Arixi, Hamish Asmath, Gholamhossein Bagheri, Katharina Baier, Adriana Bailey, Dariusz Baranowski, Alexandre Baron, Sébastien Barrau, Paul A. Barrett, Frédéric Batier, Andreas Behrendt, Arne Bendinger, Florent Beucher, Sebastien Bigorre, Edmund Blades, Peter Blossey, Olivier Bock, Steven Böing, Pierre Bosser, Denis Bourras, Pascale Bouruet-Aubertot, Keith Bower, Pierre Branellec, Hubert Branger, Michal Brennek, Alan Brewer, Pierre-Etienne Brilouet, Björn Brügmann, Stefan A. Buehler, Elmo Burke, Ralph Burton, Radiance Calmer, Jean-Christophe Canonici, Xavier Carton, Gregory Cato Jr., Jude Andre Charles, Patrick Chazette, Yanxu Chen, Michal T. Chilinski, Thomas Choularton, Patrick Chuang, Shamal Clarke, Hugh Coe, Céline Cornet, Pierre Coutris, Fleur Couvreux, Susanne Crewell, Timothy Cronin, Zhiqiang Cui, Yannis Cuypers, Alton Daley, Gillian M. Damerell, Thibaut Dauhut, Hartwig Deneke, Jean-Philippe Desbios, Steffen Dörner, Sebastian Donner, Vincent Douet, Kyla Drushka, Marina Dütsch, André Ehrlich, Kerry Emanuel, Alexandros Emmanouilidis, Jean-Claude Etienne, Sheryl Etienne-Leblanc, Ghislain Faure, Graham Feingold, Luca Ferrero, Andreas Fix, Cyrille Flamant, Piotr Jacek Flatau, Gregory R. Foltz, Linda Forster, Iulian Furtuna, Alan Gadian, Joseph Galewsky, Martin Gallagher, Peter Gallimore, Cassandra Gaston, Chelle Gentemann, Nicolas Geyskens, Andreas Giez, John Gollop, Isabelle Gouirand, Christophe Gourbeyre, Dörte de Graaf, Geiske E. de Groot, Robert Grosz, Johannes Güttler, Manuel Gutleben, Kashawn Hall, George Harris, Kevin C. Helfer, Dean Henze, Calvert Herbert, Bruna Holanda, Antonio Ibanez-Landeta, Janet Intrieri, Suneil Iyer, Fabrice Julien, Heike Kalesse, Jan Kazil, Alexander Kellman, Abiel T. Kidane, Ulrike Kirchner, Marcus Klingebiel, Mareike Körner, Leslie Ann Kremper, Jan Kretzschmar, Ovid Krüger, Wojciech Kumala, Armin Kurz, Pierre L'Hégaret, Matthieu Labaste, Tom Lachlan-Cope, Arlene Laing, Peter Landschützer, Theresa Lang, Diego Lange, Ingo Lange, Clément Laplace, Gauke Lavik, Rémi Laxenaire, Caroline Le Bihan, Mason Leandro, Nathalie Lefevre, Marius Lena, Donald Lenschow, Qiang Li, Gary Lloyd, Sebastian Los, Niccolò Losi, Oscar Lovell, Christopher Luneau, Przemyslaw Makuch, Szymon Malinowski, Gaston Manta, Eleni Marinou, Nicholas Marsden, Sebastien Masson, Nicolas Maury, Bernhard Mayer, Margarette Mayers-Als, Christophe Mazel, Wayne McGeary, James C. McWilliams, Mario Mech, Melina Mehlmann, Agostino Niyonkuru Meroni, Theresa Mieslinger, Andreas Minikin, Peter Minnett, Gregor Möller, Yanmichel Morfa Avalos, Caroline Muller, Ionela Musat, Anna Napoli, Almuth Neuberger, Christophe Noisel, David Noone, Freja Nordsiek, Jakub L. Nowak, Lothar Oswald, Douglas J. Parker, Carolyn Peck, Renaud Person, Miriam Philippi, Albert Plueddemann, Christopher Pöhlker, Veronika Pörtge, Ulrich Pöschl, Lawrence Pologne, Michał Posyniak, Marc Prange, Estefanía Quiñones Meléndez, Jule Radtke, Karim Ramage, Jens Reimann, Lionel Renault, Klaus Reus, Ashford Reyes, Joachim Ribbe, Maximilian Ringel, Markus Ritschel, Cesar B. Rocha, Nicolas Rochetin, Johannes Röttenbacher, Callum Rollo, Haley Royer, Pauline Sadoulet, Leo Saffin, Sanola Sandiford, Irina Sandu, Michael Schäfer, Vera Schemann, Imke Schirmacher, Oliver Schlenczek, Jerome Schmidt, Marcel Schröder, Alfons Schwarzenboeck, Andrea Sealy, Christoph J. Senff, Ilya Serikov, Samkeyat Shohan, Elizabeth Siddle, Alexander Smirnov, Florian Späth, Branden Spooner, M. Katharina Stolla, Wojciech Szkółka, Simon P. de Szoeke, Stéphane Tarot, Eleni Tetoni, Elizabeth Thompson, Jim Thomson, Lorenzo Tomassini, Julien Totems, Alma Anna Ubele, Leonie Villiger, Jan von Arx, Thomas Wagner, Andi Walther, Ben Webber, Manfred Wendisch, Shanice Whitehall, Anton Wiltshire, Allison A. Wing, Martin Wirth, Jonathan Wiskandt, Kevin Wolf, Ludwig Worbes, Ethan Wright, Volker Wulfmeyer, Shanea Young, Chidong Zhang, Dongxiao Zhang, Florian Ziemen, Tobias Zinner, and Martin Zöger
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4067–4119, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4067-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4067-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The EUREC4A field campaign, designed to test hypothesized mechanisms by which clouds respond to warming and benchmark next-generation Earth-system models, is presented. EUREC4A comprised roughly 5 weeks of measurements in the downstream winter trades of the North Atlantic – eastward and southeastward of Barbados. It was the first campaign that attempted to characterize the full range of processes and scales influencing trade wind clouds.
Jakub L. Nowak, Holger Siebert, Kai-Erik Szodry, and Szymon P. Malinowski
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10965–10991, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10965-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10965-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Turbulence properties in two cases of a marine stratocumulus-topped boundary layer have been compared using high-resolution helicopter-borne in situ measurements. In the coupled one, small-scale turbulence was close to isotropic and reasonably followed inertial range scaling according to Kolmogorov theory. In the decoupled one, turbulence was more anisotropic and the scaling deviated from theory. This was more pronounced in the cloud and subcloud layers in comparison to the surface mixed layer.
Jakub L. Nowak, Moein Mohammadi, and Szymon P. Malinowski
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 2615–2633, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-2615-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-2615-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A commercial instrument that characterizes sprays via shadowgraphy imaging was applied to measure the number concentration and size distribution of cloud droplets. Laboratory and field tests were performed to verify the resolution, detection reliability and sizing accuracy. We developed a correction to the data processing method which improves the estimation of cloud microphysical properties. The paper concludes with recommendations concerning the use of the instrument in cloud physics studies.
Katarzyna Karpińska, Jonathan F. E. Bodenschatz, Szymon P. Malinowski, Jakub L. Nowak, Steffen Risius, Tina Schmeissner, Raymond A. Shaw, Holger Siebert, Hengdong Xi, Haitao Xu, and Eberhard Bodenschatz
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 4991–5003, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-4991-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-4991-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Observations of clouds at a mountain-top laboratory revealed for the first time the presence of “voids”, i.e., elongated volumes inside a cloud that are devoid of droplets. Theoretical and numerical analyses suggest that these voids are a result of strong and long-lasting vortex presence in turbulent air. If this is confirmed in further investigation, the effect may become an important part of models describing cloud evolution and rain formation.
Marta Wacławczyk, Yong-Feng Ma, Jacek M. Kopeć, and Szymon P. Malinowski
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 4573–4585, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4573-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4573-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
We propose two novel methods to estimate turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate applicable to airborne measurements. In this way we increase robustness of the dissipation rate retrieval and extend its applicability to a wider range of data sets. The new approaches relate the predicted form of the dissipation spectrum to the mean of zero crossings of the measured velocity fluctuations. The methods are easy to implement numerically, and estimates remain unaffected by certain measurement errors.
Imai Jen-La Plante, Yongfeng Ma, Katarzyna Nurowska, Hermann Gerber, Djamal Khelif, Katarzyna Karpinska, Marta K. Kopec, Wojciech Kumala, and Szymon P. Malinowski
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 9711–9725, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9711-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-9711-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Using airborne data from of Physics of Stratocumulus Top campaign we analysed turbulence at the interface between free troposphere and cloud top. We found turbulence in temperature inversion capping cloud as well as in adjacent cloud top layer very anisotropic. Eddies are elongated horizontally by wind shear and flattened by static stability. These properties of turbulence at the cloud top were overlooked so far, which explains problems with understanding of entrainment at stratocumulus top.
Jacek M. Kopeć, Kamil Kwiatkowski, Siebren de Haan, and Szymon P. Malinowski
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 2253–2265, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-2253-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-2253-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
This paper is presenting a feasibility study focused on methods of estimating the turbulence intensity based on a class of navigational messages routinely broadcast by the commercial aircraft (known as ADS-B and Mode-S). Using this kind of information could have potentially significant impact on aviation safety. Three methods have been investigated.
H. Siebert, R. A. Shaw, J. Ditas, T. Schmeissner, S. P. Malinowski, E. Bodenschatz, and H. Xu
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 3219–3228, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3219-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3219-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
We report results from simultaneous, high-resolution and collocated measurements of cloud microphysical and turbulence properties during several warm cloud events at the Umweltforschungsstation Schneefernerhaus (UFS) on Zugspitze in the German Alps. The data gathered were found to be representative of observations made with similar instrumentation in free clouds.
S. P. Malinowski, H. Gerber, I. Jen-La Plante, M. K. Kopec, W. Kumala, K. Nurowska, P. Y. Chuang, D. Khelif, and K. E. Haman
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 12171–12186, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-12171-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-12171-2013, 2013
W. Kumala, K. E. Haman, M. K. Kopec, D. Khelif, and S. P. Malinowski
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 2043–2054, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-2043-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-2043-2013, 2013
Related subject area
Subject: Clouds | Technique: In Situ Measurement | Topic: Validation and Intercomparisons
A study of optical scattering modelling for mixed-phase polar stratospheric clouds
Technique for comparison of backscatter coefficients derived from in situ cloud probe measurements with concurrent airborne lidar
Intercomparison of holographic imaging and single-particle forward light scattering in situ measurements of liquid clouds in changing atmospheric conditions
Design and field campaign validation of a multi-rotor unmanned aerial vehicle and optical particle counter
In situ cloud ground-based measurements in the Finnish sub-Arctic: intercomparison of three cloud spectrometer setups
Evaluation of cloud properties from reanalyses over East Asia with a radiance-based approach
Laboratory and in-flight evaluation of measurement uncertainties from a commercial Cloud Droplet Probe (CDP)
A statistical comparison of cirrus particle size distributions measured using the 2-D stereo probe during the TC4, SPARTICUS, and MACPEX flight campaigns with historical cirrus datasets
Comparing the cloud vertical structure derived from several methods based on radiosonde profiles and ground-based remote sensing measurements
A comparison of light backscattering and particle size distribution measurements in tropical cirrus clouds
Cloud particle size distributions measured with an airborne digital in-line holographic instrument
Francesco Cairo, Terry Deshler, Luca Di Liberto, Andrea Scoccione, and Marcel Snels
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 16, 419–431, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-419-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-419-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The T-matrix theory was used to compute the backscatter and depolarization of mixed-phase PSC, assuming that particles are solid (NAT or possibly ice) above a threshold radius R and liquid (STS) below, and a single shape is common to all solid particles. We used a dataset of coincident lidar and balloon-borne backscattersonde and OPC measurements. The agreement between modelled and measured backscatter is reasonable and allows us to constrain the parameters R and AR.
Shawn Wendell Wagner and David James Delene
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 6447–6466, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-6447-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-6447-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Jet engine power loss due to ice accumulation is a hazard in high-altitude clouds. A potential tool for informing pilots when entering such clouds is an onboard lidar system. Lidar and wing-mounted probe backscatter coefficients agree within uncertainties for liquid clouds but not for ice clouds. The lidar measurements are correlated with total water content over a broad range of environments, which indicates that the lidar system is useful for detecting hazardous ice cloud conditions.
Petri Tiitta, Ari Leskinen, Ville A. Kaikkonen, Eero O. Molkoselkä, Anssi J. Mäkynen, Jorma Joutsensaari, Silvia Calderon, Sami Romakkaniemi, and Mika Komppula
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 2993–3009, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-2993-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-2993-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The novel holographic imaging instrument (ICEMET) was adapted to measure the microphysical properties of liquid clouds, and these values were compared with parallel measurements of a cloud droplet spectrometer (FM-120) and particle measurements using a twin-inlet system. When the intercomparison was carried out during isoaxial sampling, our results showed good agreement in terms of variability between the instruments. This agreement was confirmed using Mutual and Pearson correlation analyses.
Joseph Girdwood, Helen Smith, Warren Stanley, Zbigniew Ulanowski, Chris Stopford, Charles Chemel, Konstantinos-Matthaios Doulgeris, David Brus, David Campbell, and Robert Mackenzie
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 6613–6630, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6613-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6613-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We present the design and validation of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) equipped with a bespoke optical particle counter (OPC). This is used to monitor atmospheric particles, which have significant effects on our weather and climate. These effects are hard to characterise properly, partly because they occur in regions that are not commonly accessible to traditional instrumentation. Our new platform gives us the capability to access these regions.
Konstantinos-Matthaios Doulgeris, Mika Komppula, Sami Romakkaniemi, Antti-Pekka Hyvärinen, Veli-Matti Kerminen, and David Brus
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 5129–5147, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5129-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5129-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We intercompared three cloud spectrometers ground setups in conditions with frequently occurring supercooled clouds. The measurements were conducted during the Pallas Cloud Experiment (PaCE) in 2013, in the Finnish sub-Arctic region at Sammaltunturi station. The main meteorological parameters influencing the spectrometers' performance was the wind direction. Final recommendations and our view on the main limitations of each spectrometer ground setup are presented.
Bin Yao, Chao Liu, Yan Yin, Zhiquan Liu, Chunxiang Shi, Hironobu Iwabuchi, and Fuzhong Weng
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 1033–1049, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-1033-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-1033-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Due to the complex spatiotemporal and physical properties of clouds, their quantitative depictions in different atmospheric reanalysis datasets are still highly uncertain. A radiance-based evaluation approach is developed to evaluate the quality of cloud properties by directly comparing them with satellite radiance observations. ERA5 and CRA are found to have great capability in representing the cloudy atmosphere over East Asia, and MERRA-2 tends to slightly overestimate clouds over the region.
Spencer Faber, Jeffrey R. French, and Robert Jackson
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 3645–3659, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3645-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3645-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Laboratory and in-flight evaluations of uncertainties of measurements from a cloud droplet probe are presented. This study extends results of earlier studies by examining instrument response over a greater range of droplet sizes throughout the entire sample volume. Errors in droplet sizing based on the laboratory measurements tend to be less than 10 %, significantly less than typically quoted sizing accuracy for this class of instrument.
M. Christian Schwartz
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 3041–3055, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3041-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3041-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Measurements of ice cloud particle populations are needed to improve climate and weather prediction. This paper makes a comparison between ice cloud particle populations measured using two different airborne cloud particle probes. It is concluded that measurements of particle populations from older probes are similar to those from newer probes, except in total numbers of particles counted. Therefore, more airborne studies of ice clouds need to be made using newer cloud particle probes.
M. Costa-Surós, J. Calbó, J. A. González, and C. N. Long
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 2757–2773, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2757-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-2757-2014, 2014
F. Cairo, G. Di Donfrancesco, M. Snels, F. Fierli, M. Viterbini, S. Borrmann, and W. Frey
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 557–570, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-557-2011, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-557-2011, 2011
J. P. Fugal and R. A. Shaw
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 2, 259–271, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2-259-2009, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2-259-2009, 2009
Cited articles
Badura, M., Batog, P., Drzeniecka-Osiadacz, A., and Modzel, P.: Evaluation of Low-Cost Sensors for Ambient PM2.5 Monitoring, J. Sensors, 2018, 5096540, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5096540, 2018. a, b
Barmpadimos, I., Keller, J., Oderbolz, D., Hueglin, C., and Prévôt, A. S. H.: One decade of parallel fine (PM2.5) and coarse (PM10–PM2.5) particulate matter measurements in Europe: trends and variability, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 3189–3203, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-3189-2012, 2012. a
Bartok, J., Bott, A., and Gera, M.: Fog Prediction for Road Traffic Safety in a Coastal Desert Region, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 145, 485–506, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-012-9750-5, 2012. a
Beloconi, A. and Vounatsou, P.: Substantial Reduction in Particulate Matter Air Pollution across Europe during 2006–2019: A Spatiotemporal Modeling Analysis, Environ. Sci. Technol., 55, 15505–15518, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c03748, 2021. a
Burnet, F., Lac, C., Martinet, P., Fourrié, N., Haeffelin, M., Delanoë, J., Price, J., Barrau, S., Canut, G., Cayez, G., Dabas, A., Denjean, C., Dupont, J.-C., Honnert, R., Mahfouf, J.-F., Montmerle, T., Roberts, G., Seity, Y., and Vié, B.: The SOuth west FOGs 3D experiment for processes study (SOFOG3D) project, EGU General Assembly 2020, Online, 4–8 May 2020, EGU2020-17836, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-17836, 2020. a
Colette, A. and Rouïl, L.: ETC/ATNI Report 16/2019: Air Quality Trends in Europe: 2000–2017. Assessment for surface SO2, NO2, Ozone, PM10 and PM2.5 – Eionet Portal, Eionet Report – ETC/ATNI 2019/16,
https://www.eionet.europa.eu/etcs/etc-atni/products/etc-atni-reports/etc-atni-report-16-2019-air-quality-trends-in-europe-2000-2017-assessment-for-surface-so2-no2-ozone-pm10-and-pm2-5-1 (last access: 1 August 2022), 2021. a
Considine, E. M., Reid, C. E., Ogletree, M. R., and Dye, T.: Improving accuracy of air pollution exposure measurements: Statistical correction of a municipal low-cost airborne particulate matter sensor network, Environ. Pollut., 268, 115833, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115833, 2021. a
Crilley, L. R., Shaw, M., Pound, R., Kramer, L. J., Price, R., Young, S., Lewis, A. C., and Pope, F. D.: Evaluation of a low-cost optical particle counter (Alphasense OPC-N2) for ambient air monitoring, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 709–720, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-709-2018, 2018. a
Degefie, D., El-Madany, T.-S., Hejkal, J., Held, M., Dupont, J.-C., Haeffelin, M., and Klemm, O.: Microphysics and energy and water fluxes of various fog types at SIRTA, France, Atmos. Res., 151, 162–175,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.03.016, 2015. a
Elias, T., Haeffelin, M., Drobinski, P., Gomes, L., Rangognio, J., Bergot, T., Chazette, P., Raut, J., and Colomb, M.: Extinction of Light during the Fog Life Cycle: a Result from the ParisFog Experiment, AIP Conf. Proc., 1100, 165–168, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3116939, 2009a. a
Elias, T., Haeffelin, M., Drobinski, P., Gomes, L., Rangognio, J., Bergot, T., Chazette, P., Raut, J.-C., and Colomb, M.: Particulate contribution to extinction of visible radiation: Pollution, haze, and fog, Atmos. Res., 92, 443–454, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2009.01.006, 2009b. a
Feinberg, S. N., Williams, R., Hagler, G., Low, J., Smith, L., Brown, R., Garver, D., Davis, M., Morton, M., Schaefer, J., and Campbell, J.: Examining spatiotemporal variability of urban particulate matter and application of high-time resolution data from a network of low-cost air pollution sensors, Atmos. Environ., 213, 579–584, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.06.026, 2019. a
Girdwood, J., Smith, H., Stanley, W., Ulanowski, Z., Stopford, C., Chemel, C., Doulgeris, K.-M., Brus, D., Campbell, D., and Mackenzie, R.: Design and field campaign validation of a multi-rotor unmanned aerial vehicle and optical particle counter, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 6613–6630, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6613-2020, 2020. a
Gultepe, I.: Fog and Boundary Layer Clouds: Fog Visibility and Forecasting,
Birkhäuser, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7643-8419-7, 2007. a
Gultepe, I., Tardif, R., Michaelides, S., Cermak, J., Bott, A., Muller, M.,
Pagowski, M., Hansen, B., Ellrod, G., Jacobs, W., Toth, G., and Cober, S.:
Fog research: A review of past achievements and future perspectives, Pure
Appl. Geophys., 164, 1121–1159, 2007. a
Gultepe, I., Pearson, G., Milbrandt, J. A., Hansen, B., Platnick, S., Taylor, P., Gordon, M., Oakley, J. P., and Cober, S. G.: The Fog Remote Sensing and Modeling Field Project, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 90, 341–360, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008BAMS2354.1, 2009. a
Gultepe, I., Zhou, B., Milbrandt, J., Bott, A., Li, Y., Heymsfield, A.,
Ferrier, B., Ware, R., Pavolonis, M., Kuhn, T., Gurka, J., Liu, P., and
Cermak, J.: A review on ice fog measurements and modeling, Atmos. Res., 151, 2–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.04.014, 2015. a
Gultepe, I., Milbrandt, J. A., and Zhou, B.: Marine Fog: A Review on Microphysics and Visibility Prediction, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 345–394, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45229-6_7, 2017. a
Gultepe, I., Heymsfield, A., Fernando, H., Pardyjak, E., Dorman, C., Wang, Q., Creegan, E., Hoch, S., Flagg, D., Yamaguchi, R., Krishnamurthy, R., Gabersek, S., Perrie, W., Perelet, A., Singh, D., Chang, R., Nagare, B., Wagh, S., and Wang, S.: A Review of Coastal Fog Microphysics During C-FOG, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 181, 1–39, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-021-00659-5, 2021. a, b
Habeck, J. B., Hogan, C. J., Flaten, J. A., and Candler, G. V.: Development of a calibration system for measuring aerosol particles in the stratosphere, in: AIAA SCITECH 2022 Forum, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., p. 1582, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2022-1582, 2022. a
Haeffelin, M., Bergot, T., Elias, T., Tardif, R., Carrer, D., Chazette, P., Colomb, M., Drobinski, P., Dupont, E., Dupont, J.-C., Gomes, L., Musson-Genon, L., Pietras, C., Plana-Fattori, A., Protat, A., Rangognio, J., Raut, J.-C., Rémy, S., Richard, D., Sciare, J., and Zhang, X.: Parisfog: Shedding new Light on Fog Physical Processes, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 91, 767–783, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009BAMS2671.1, 2010. a
Hagan, D. H. and Kroll, J. H.: Assessing the accuracy of low-cost optical particle sensors using a physics-based approach, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 6343–6355, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6343-2020, 2020. a, b, c
Hale, G. M. and Querry, M. R.: Optical Constants of Water in the 200-nm to
200-µm Wavelength Region, Appl. Opt., 12, 555–563,
https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.12.000555, 1973. a
Hamazu, K., Hashiguchi, H., Wakayama, T., Matsuda, T., Doviak, R. J., and Fukao, S.: A 35-GHz Scanning Doppler Radar for Fog Observations, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 20, 972–986, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(2003)20<972:AGSDRF>2.0.CO;2, 2003. a
Hu, H., Sun, J., and Zhang, Q.: Assessing the Impact of Surface and Wind Profiler Data on Fog Forecasting Using WRF 3DVAR: An OSSE Study on a Dense Fog Event over North China, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 56, 1059–1081, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-16-0246.1, 2017. a
Jayaratne, R., Liu, X., Thai, P., Dunbabin, M., and Morawska, L.: The influence of humidity on the performance of a low-cost air particle mass sensor and the effect of atmospheric fog, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 4883–4890, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4883-2018, 2018. a
Kashdan, J. T., Shrimpton, J. S., and Whybrew, A.: Two-Phase Flow Characterization by Automated Digital Image Analysis. Part 1: Fundamental Principles and Calibration of the Technique, Part. Part. Syst. Char., 20, 387–397, https://doi.org/10.1002/ppsc.200300897, 2003. a, b, c, d
Kashdan, J. T., Shrimpton, J. S., and Whybrew, A.: Two-Phase Flow Characterization by Automated Digital Image Analysis. Part 2: Application of
PDIA for Sizing Sprays, Part. Part. Syst. Char., 21, 15–23, https://doi.org/10.1002/ppsc.200400898, 2004. a
Klemm, O. and Lin, N.-H.: What Causes Observed Fog Trends: Air Quality or Climate Change?, Aerosol Air Qual. Res., 16, 1131–1142, https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2015.05.0353, 2016. a
Kulkarni, R., Jenamani, R. K., Pithani, P., Konwar, M., Nigam, N., and Ghude, S. D.: Loss to Aviation Economy Due to Winter Fog in New Delhi during the Winter of 2011–2016, Atmosphere, 10, 198, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10040198, 2019. a
Liu, D., Yang, J., Niu, S., and Li, Z.: On the Evolution and Structure of a Radiation Fog Event in Nanjing, Adv. Atmos. Sci., 28, 223–237, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-010-0017-0, 2011. a
Liu, H.-Y., Schneider, P., Haugen, R., and Vogt, M.: Performance Assessment of a Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensor for a near Four-Month Period in Oslo, Norway, Atmosphere, 10, 41, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10020041, 2019. a
Martinet, P., Cimini, D., Burnet, F., Ménétrier, B., Michel, Y., and Unger, V.: Improvement of numerical weather prediction model analysis during fog conditions through the assimilation of ground-based microwave radiometer observations: a 1D-Var study, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 6593–6611, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6593-2020, 2020. a
Martinet, P., Burnet, F., Bell, A., Kremer, A., Letillois, M., Löhnert, U., Antoine, S., Caumont, O., Cimini, D., Delanöe, J., Hervo, M., Huet, T., Georgis, J.-F., Orlandi, E., Price, J., Raynaud, L., Rottner, L., Seity, Y., and Unger, V.: Benefit of microwave radiometer and cloud radar observations for data assimilation and fog process studies during the SOFOG3D experiment, EMS Annual Meeting 2021, online, 6–10 September 2021, EMS2021-232, https://doi.org/10.5194/ems2021-232, 2021. a
Mazoyer, M., Burnet, F., Denjean, C., Roberts, G. C., Haeffelin, M., Dupont, J.-C., and Elias, T.: Experimental study of the aerosol impact on fog microphysics, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 4323–4344, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-4323-2019, 2019. a, b
Mazoyer, M., Burnet, F., and Denjean, C.: Experimental study on the evolution of droplet size distribution during the fog life cycle, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11305–11321, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11305-2022, 2022. a, b
Mohammadi, M., Nowak, J. L., Bertens, G., Moláček, J., Kumala, W., and Malinowski, S. P.: Cloud microphysical measurements at a mountain observatory: comparison between shadowgraph imaging and phase Doppler interferometry, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 965–985, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-965-2022, 2022. a, b
Okamoto, H., Sato, K., Nishizawa, T., Sugimoto, N., Makino, T., Jin, Y.,
Shimizu, A., Takano, T., and Fujikawa, M.: Development of a
multiple-field-of-view multiple-scattering polarization lidar: comparison
with cloud radar, Opt. Express, 24, 30053–30067,
https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.24.030053, 2016.
a
Posyniak, M., Markowicz, K., Czyzewska, D., Chilinski, M., Makuch, P.,
Zawadzka-Manko, O., Kucieba, S., Kulesza, K., Kachniarz, K., Mijal, K., and
Borek, K.: Experimental study of smog microphysical and optical vertical
structure in the Silesian Beskids, Poland, Atmos. Pollut. Res.,
12, 101171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2021.101171, 2021. a
Price, J. D., Lane, S., Boutle, I. A., Smith, D. K. E., Bergot, T., Lac, C.,
Duconge, L., McGregor, J., Kerr-Munslow, A., Pickering, M., and Clark, R.:
LANFEX: A Field and Modeling Study to Improve Our Understanding and
Forecasting of Radiation Fog, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 99, 2061–2077, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0299.1, 2018. a
Pruppacher, H. and Klett, J.: Microstructure of Atmospheric Clouds and
Precipitation, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 10–73,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-48100-0_2, 2010. a
Tsai, I.-C., Hsieh, P.-R., Cheung, H. C., and Chung-Kuang Chou, C.: Aerosol
impacts on fog microphysics over the western side of Taiwan Strait in April
from 2015 to 2017, Atmos. Environ., 262, 118523,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118523, 2021. a, b
Vautard, R., Yiou, P., and Van Oldenborgh, G. J.: Decline of fog, mist and haze in Europe over the past 30years, Nat. Geosci., 2, 115–119,
https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo414, 2009. a, b
Vishwakarma, P., Delanoë, J., Le Gac, C., Bertrand, F., Dupont, J.-C., Haeffelin, M., Martinet, P., Burnet, F., Lac, C., Bell, A., Vignelles, D., Toledo, F., Jorquera, S., and Vinson, J.-P.: Fog Analysis during SOFOG3D Experiment, EGU General Assembly 2021, online, 19–30 April 2021, EGU21-9941, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu21-9941, 2021. a
Wang, Q., Yamaguchi, R. T., Kalogiros, J. A., Daniels, Z., Alappattu, D. P., Jonsson, H., Alvarenga, O., Olson, A., Wauer, B. J., Ortiz-Suslow, D. G., and
Fernando, H. J.: Microphysics and Optical Attenuation in Fog: Observations
from Two Coastal Sites, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 181, 267–292,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-021-00675-5, 2021. a
Wang, Y., Li, J., Jing, H., Zhang, Q., Jiang, J., and Biswas, P.: Laboratory Evaluation and Calibration of Three Low-Cost Particle Sensors for Particulate
Matter Measurement, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 49, 1063–1077,
https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2015.1100710, 2015. a
Wærsted, E. G., Haeffelin, M., Dupont, J.-C., Delanoë, J., and Dubuisson, P.: Radiation in fog: quantification of the impact on fog liquid water based on ground-based remote sensing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 10811–10835, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10811-2017, 2017. a
Weston, M., Francis, D., Nelli, N., Fonseca, R., Temimi, M., and Addad, Y.: The First Characterization of Fog Microphysics in the United Arab Emirates, an Arid Region on the Arabian Peninsula, Earth Space Sci., 9, e2021EA002032, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EA002032, 2022. a
Xu, W., Yang, H., Sun, D., Qi, X., and Xian, J.: Lidar system with a fast
scanning speed for sea fog detection, Opt. Express, 30, 27462–27471,
https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.464190, 2022. a
Short summary
In this paper we evaluate the low-cost Alphasense OPC-N3 optical particle counter for measurements of fog microphysics. We compare OPC-N3 with the Oxford Lasers VisiSize D30. This work is significant because OPC-N3 can be used with drones for vertical profiles in fog.
In this paper we evaluate the low-cost Alphasense OPC-N3 optical particle counter for...